Recent Comments
Advertisements
Category Archives: open access
OpenCitations and the Initiative for Open Citations: A Clarification
Some folk are confused, but OpenCitations and the Initiative for Open Citations, despite the similarity of their names, are two distinct organizations. OpenCitations (http://opencitations.net) is an open scholarly infrastructure organization directed by Silvio Peroni and myself, and its primary purpose … Continue reading
Oxford University Press opens its references!
Good news! Today, on January 16th 2018, Oxford University Press (OUP) announced its participation in the Initiative for Open Citations, and requested Crossref to turn on reference sharing for all OUP deposited references from more than half a million publications. … Continue reading
Posted in Bibliographic references, open access, Open Citations, Open scholarship
Tagged bibliography, citation data, CrossRef, I4OC, open access, references
1 Comment
Funders should mandate open citations
On 9th January 2018, I published a World View article in Nature entitled Funders should mandate open citations [1], in which I argue that access to open references from scholarly publications is so important that, when encouragements from organisations such as the … Continue reading
Posted in Bibliographic references, open access, Open Citations, Open scholarship
Tagged funder mandate, I4OC, open reference lists
1 Comment
Barriers to comprehensive reference availability
Two significant barriers prevent comprehensive reference availability through Crossref. The first barrier First, two-thirds of Crossref’s publisher-members, in particular the smaller ones, do not submit references along with the other details of their publications. Many of these published works are of … Continue reading
Posted in Bibliographic references, Data publication, open access, Open Citations, Open scholarship
Tagged arXiv, CrossRef, Dryad
2 Comments
The new Crossref reference distribution policy
Since 1st January 2018, Crossref has had a new reference distribution policy, described at https://www.crossref.org/reference-distribution/. There are three possible options for setting the reference distribution preference from which a publisher can choose, these being ‘Closed’, ‘Limited’ and ‘Open”. If the … Continue reading
Openness of non-Elsevier references
For completeness, this post, also based on analyses performed by Daniel Ecer of eLife (d.ecer@elifesciences.org) on data he downloaded from Crossref in September 2017 (Ecer, 2017), complements the two preceding posts, and details the openness of references from scholarly publishers other … Continue reading
Elsevier references dominate those that are not open at Crossref
Yesterday (November 23rd 2017) I was working with Daniel Ecer of eLife (d.ecer@elifesciences.org) to dig some hard facts out of the analyses he undertook on data he downloaded from Crossref in September 2017 (Ecer, 2017). Because of its dominant position in … Continue reading
